MODULE 2

lesson 1

MORAL AGENT & THE

HUMAN ACTS
Moral Agent –A moral agent is a person who has the ability to discern right
from wrong and to be held accountable for his or her own actions. Moral agents
have a moral responsibility not to cause unjustified harm. Traditionally, moral
agency is assigned only to those who can be held responsible for their actions.

Determinants of Morality
Moralists have outlined three main factors which, to a great extent, define the
morality of a human act. These determinants include:

1. the Object of the act

2. the End or Intention that the one performing the act has in mind.
3. the Circumstances surrounding the act
Human Acts- actions which man performs knowingly, freely and
voluntarily. These actions are the result of conscious knowledge
and are subject to control of the will. We refer to these actions as
deliberate, intentional and voluntary.
Acts of man – are those actions which happen in man. They are
instinctive and are not within the control of the will. Such actions
are the biological and physiological movements in man such as,
metabolism, respirations, fear, anger and jealousy.
For an act to be a human act it must possess the ff characteristics:

1. It must be performed by a conscious agent who is aware of what he is

doing and of its consequences. Children below the age of reason, the
insane, the senile-are considered incapable of acting knowingly.
(KNOWLEDGE)
2. It must be performed by an agent who is acting freely, that is by his own
volition and powers. An action done under duress and against one’s own will is
not entirely a free action. Voluntarily (FREEDOM)

3. It must be performed by an agent who decides willfully to perform the act.

This willfulness is the resolve to perform an act here and now or in some
future. Willingly (WILL)
KINDS OF HUMAN ACTS
1. Elicited- are those performed by the Will and are not bodily externalized.
a. WISH- the tendency of the will towards something, whether this be
realizable or not. The object of wishing may include the impossible or that
which is remotely possible.
b. INTENTION- the tendency of the will towards something attainable
but without necessarily committing oneself to attain it.
c. CONSENT- the acceptance of the will of those needed to carry out
the intention. Thus a woman who is said to show consent when she
consciously attracts attention to herself.’
d. ELECTION- is the selection of the will of those means effective enough to carry
out the intention.
e. USE-the command of the will to make use of those means elected to carry out
the intention.
f. FRUITION-the enjoyment of the will derived from the attainment of the thing he
had desired earlier.

2. Commanded acts- acts commanded by the will.

-are done either by man’s mental or bodily powers under the command of the
will. It is either INTERNAL or EXTERNAL actions.
INTERNAL actions- conscious reasoning, recalling something, encouraging
oneself, controlling aroused emotions and others.
EXTERNAL actions-walking, eating, dancing, laughing
MORAL DISTINCTIONS/ QUALITIES OF HUMAN ACTS
-human acts are either be or not with dictates of reason (reasonable ug angay nga
buhaton)
1. MORAL-actions that conforms to the norm of morality. They are good actions
and are permissible. Ex. Working, studying, telling the truth, loving and a like.
2. IMMORAL-actions not in conformity with the norms of morality. They are
bad/evil and are not permissible. Ex. Committing murder, adultery, stealing, telling
lies.
3. AMORAL- actions that are in neutral relations with the norms of morality.
Neither good nor bad in themselves. But certain amoral actions may become good
or bad depending on the circumstances. Ex. Playing basket is neither good nor bad
(as a form of exercise it is good, while as an escape to classes and duties, it is bad)
2 KINDS OF BAD/EVIL
1. INTRINSIC – evil by the act itself (integral to a nature of an act)
- intrinsic evil is invoked to describe certain kinds of human acts that can
never be morally justified or permitted, regardless of the intention of the
person who performs them or any circumstances within which they take
place.

2. EXTRINSIC- an act which in itself is not evil but is made evil

nonetheless on account of something else. Ex. Drinking liquor is not
intrinsically evil, but becomes extrinsically evil when done excessively.
IMPUTABILITY OF THE HUMAN ACTS
-The imputability of human acts means that the person performing
the acts is liable of such acts. It involves the notion of guilt or
innocence. Thus actions are either praiseworthy or blameworthy.
Actions are attributed to the doer as the principal cause.
SANCTIONS AND PENALTIES
SANCTION-a strong action taken in order to make people obey a law or
rule, or a punishment given when they do not obey
PENALTIES-punishments given for any violations of laws, norms and
standards of morality
VOLUNTARINEESS-
Perfect – it is present in the human act when the performer fully knows and
fully intends the act.
Imperfect – There is some defect in the agent's knowledge or intention, or
both.
Conditional- it is present in a human act when the agent is forced by
circumstance beyond his control to perform the act which he would not do
under normal circumstances.
Simple – it is present in a human act performed, whether the agent likes or
dislikes doing it.
Direct – is present in a human act willed in itself.
Indirect – is present in that human act which is the foreseen result
of another act directly willed.
Positive – is present in a human act of doing, performing.
Negative – is present in a human act of omitting, refraining from
doing.
Principles that determine a person responsible for an
Indirect voluntary act.
1. The doer is able to foresee the evil result or effect at
least in general way
2. The doer is free to refrain from doing that which
would produce the foreseen evil
3. The doer has moral obligation not to do that which
produces evil effect.
Principles of Double Effect-
-According to the principle of double effect, sometimes it is
permissible to cause a harm as an unintended and merely foreseen
side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even
though it would not be permissible to cause such a harm as a
means to bringing about the same good end.
1.the actions which produces the double effect must be good in
itself or at least morally indifferent.
2. The good effect must not come from the evil effect. To do evil in
order to achieve something good is not justifiable.
 LESSON 2

THE MODIFIERS
OF
HUMAN ACT
 The ideal is for man to act deliberately, that is, with perfect
voluntariness. This is not always possible though. Often times,
a certain degree of doubt or reluctance accompanies an
act. At other times, emotions hold sway, propelling action
with the swiftness of an impulse. Factors that influence man's
inner disposition towards certain actions are called "modifiers"
of human acts.
They affect the mental or emotional state of a person to
the extent that the voluntariness involved in an act is either
increased or decreased. This is significant because the
accountability of the act is correspondingly increased or
decreased.
We cite this principle:

The greater the knowledge and the freedom, the greater

the voluntariness and the moral responsibility.
The Modifiers
-Man does not act in a vacuum.
-He is an organism responding and reacting to
stimulus. His total make-up is the sum of all experiences.
-His personal background, education, social
upbringing, political persuasion, religion, and personal
aims - contribute largely to his development and
behavioral preferences.
The following are modifiers of human acts;
(1) Ignorance,
(2) Passions,
(3) Fear,
(4) Violence
(5) Habit.

There are other modifiers such as,

-hypnoticism
-brainwashing
-mental conditioning
-cultural imposition.
1. IGNORANCE
-We are familiar with the saying: "Ignorance of the law excuses no
one". This implies that one should not act in the state of ignorance
and that one who has done a wrong may not claim ignorance as a
defense. Ignorance is the absence of knowledge which a person
ought to possess.
-A lawyer is expected to know his law; the doctor, his medicine;
and the manager, his business operations. In the realm of morals,
everyone of age and reason is expected to know at least the general
norms of good behavior.
-Ignorance is either vincible or invincible
Vincible ignorance
-can easily be reminded through ordinary
diligence and reasonable efforts. The ignorance of a visitor
regarding a particular address in a certain place is vincible,
since he can easily ask for information from a policeman or
pedestrian.
Invincible ignorance is the type which a person
possesses without being aware of it or, having awareness
of it, lacks the means to rectify it. The ignorance regarding
missing persons or objects is often invincible. Sometimes, too, a
person acts without realizing certain facts. Thus, a cook might be
unaware that the food he is serving is contaminated.
-Under the category of vincible ignorance is the affected
ignorance. This is the type which a person keeps by positive
efforts in order to escape responsibility or blame. It is affected
ignorance when an employee refuses to read a memo precisely
so that he may be exempted from its requirement. (Glenn: 26-27)
Principles:
1. Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A
person cannot be held morally liable if he is not
aware of his state of ignorance. A waiter who is not
aware that the food he is serving has been poisoned
cannot be held for murder (Glenn: 32).
2. Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens
the voluntariness and the corresponding accountability
over the act. A person who becomes aware of the state of
ignorance he is in has the moral obligation to rectify it by
exercising reasonable diligence in seeking the needed
information. To act with vincible ignorance is to act
imprudently. A waiter who suspects that the food he is
serving has been laced with poison has the moral obligation
to ascertain the fact or, at least, forewarn the guests about
his suspicion (Glenn: 33).
3. Affected ignorance, though it decreases voluntariness,
increases the accountability over the resultant act.
-Insofar as affected ignorance interferes with the
intellect, it decreases voluntariness. But insofar as itis
willed to persist, it increases accountability. Certainly,
refusing to rectify ignorance implies malice. And the
malice is greater when ignorance is used as an excuse for
not doing the right thing.
-Thus, a child who refuses to be guided by his
parents has only himself to blame for his wrongdoing.
2. Passions
-Passions, or concupiscence, are either tendencies towards
desirable objects, or, tendencies away from undesirable or
harmful things. The former are called positive emotions; the
latter, negative emotions.
-The positive emotions include love, desire, delight, hope
and bravery.
-The negative emotions include hatred, horror, sadness,
despair, fear and anger.
 -Passions are psychic responses. As such, they are
neither moral or immoral. However, man is bound to
regulate his emotions and submit them to the control of
reason.
-Passions are either antecedent or consequent.
Antecedent are those that precede an act. It may happen
that a person is emotionally aroused to perform an act.
Antecedent passions predispose a person to act. Thus, love
may induce one to make numerous and lengthy phone calls
to his sweetheart, or, to plot the murder of a rival.
Principles:
Antecedent passions do not always destroy voluntariness,
but they diminish accountability for the resultant act.
Antecedent passions weaken the will power of a person
without, however, completely obstructing his freedom.
Thus, the so called "crimes of passion" are voluntary. But
insofar as passions interfere with the freedom of the will,
one's accountability is diminished (Panizo: 33)
Consequent passions are those that are intentionally
aroused and kept. Consequent passions, therefore, are said
to be voluntary in cause, the result of the will playing the
strings of emotions.
-Thus, a young man may deliberately arouse himself
sexually by reading pornographic magazines. Or a victim of
injustice may intentionally nurse his resentment
towards his tormentor. The young man who
commits lasciviousness after arousing himself sexually
and the fellow who commits vengeance due to
his cultivated resentment - are both morally accountable.
Principle:
Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, but
may even increase accountability. This is because
consequent passions are the direct results of the will
which fully consents to them instead of subordinating
them to its control
3. Fear
Fear is the disturbance of the mind of a person who is
confronted by an impending danger or harm to himself or
loved ones. Distinction is made however between an act
done with fear and an act done out or because of fear.
Certain actions which by nature are dangerous or risky
are done with varying degree of fear.
-Climbing a cliff, flying an airplane through a storm,
diving for pearls, or arresting a notorious killer - are
examples of acts performed with fear.
-In these cases, fear is a normal response to danger.
Such actions are voluntary, because the doer is in full
control of his faculties and acts in spite of his fear.
-Fear is an instinct for self-preservation.
-We even fear new experiences or situations such as,
embarking on a long journey, being left alone in a
strange place, or being asked to speak before a group of
people.
-But doing something out of fear, or because of it, is
entirely different.
-Here, fear becomes a positive force compelling a
person to act without careful deliberation.
-The child reads his book or of fear of the mother; the
employee volunteers to work over-time out of fear of being
fired by the boss; a friend stops smoking out of fear of
contracting cancer. These examples show how actions are
done because of fear.
-Fear modifies the freedom of the doer, inducing him to
action a certain predetermined manner, often without his full
consent.
Principles:
1. Acts done with fear are voluntary. A person acting with
fear is acting in spite of his fear and is in full control of himself.
2. Acts done out of fear, however great, is simply voluntary,
although it is also conditionally voluntary. (Glenn:41) It is
simply voluntary because the person remains in control of his
faculties, including that of moderating fear. It is also"
conditionally involuntary" because, if it were not for
the presence of something feared, the person would not act.
or would act in another way. (Ibid.: 41)
3. Acts done because of intense fear or panic are involuntary. -
-Panic completely obscures the mind. In this mental state, a
person is not expected to think sensibly.
-Thus, a person in a state of panic might jump from the 12th
floor of a burning building. Such act is not considered a suicide,
since it is done involuntarily.
-Panic causes a person to lose complete control of himself.
Intimidating or threatening a person with harm is an unjust act.
Legally speaking, actions done out of fear are invalid acts.
-Thus, contracts entered into out of fear are voidable, meaning,
they can later on be annulled. It is grossly unfair to oblige any person
to fulfill a contract obtained by force or threat. (Ibid.:42
4. Violence
-Violence refers to any physical force exerted on a person by another free
agent for the purpose of compelling said person to act against his will. Bodily
torture, maltreatment, isolation, and mutilation -are examples of violence against
persons.
Principles
1. External actions, or commanded actions, performed by a person subjected
to violence, to which reasonable resistance has been offered, are involuntary and
are not accountable. (Ibid.: 43)
-Active resistance should always be offered to an unjust aggressor. However,
if resistance is impossible, or if there is a serious threat to one's life, a person
confronted by violence can always offer intrinsic resistance by withholding
consent; that is enough to save his moral integrity. (Panizo: 37
2. Elicited acts, or those done by the will alone, are not subject to
violence and are therefore voluntary.
-The Will insofar as it is a spiritual faculty is not within the reach of
violence. History carries the story of thousand heroes who had suffered
death instead of surrendering their will to that of their tormentors.
-On the contrary, we consider them villains or weaklings those who
succumbed and consented to the wishes of tyrants. But we may not
be too harsh on them, since every man has his own limit of
endurance. "Violence of force", says Bernard Haring, "in any instance, if
bound up with the refined cruelty of present-day methods of
psychological torture, can constitute a serious temptation and often also
contribute towards a notable diminution of inner freedom."
Habits
-Habit, as defined by Glenn, "is a lasting readiness and facility, of
frequently repeated acts, for acting in a certain manner”
-Habits are acquired inclinations towards something to be done. They
assume the role of a second nature, moving one who has them to perform
certain acts with relative ease.
-The word "habit-forming" that we use to refer to certain experiences
shows how easy it is for one to acquire a habit.
-It also implies that a habit is not that easy to overcome or alter.
-It requires a strong-willed person to correct a habit successfully within a
limited period of time.
-Thus, alcoholics and smokers find it almost impossible to reform.
Principles
-Actions done by force of habit are voluntary in cause, unless a
reasonable effort is made to counteract the habitual inclination.
-Habits are either good or bad. We speak here of bad habits
which lead to immoral actions. Habits are voluntary in cause,
because they are the result of previously willed acts done repeatedly
as a matter of fact.
-Thus, every action emanating from habit is said to partake of
the voluntariness of those previous acts. Therefore, for as long as the
habit is not corrected, evil actions done by force of that habit are
voluntary and accountable.
 -When a person decides to fight his habit, and for as long as the
effort towards this purpose continues, actions resulting from such
habit may be regarded as acts of man and not accountable.

Action and Emotion

-Man does not act the way a robot does - without feeling or
emotion.
-In doing his act, man does not only evoke certain sentiments,
but his decision or intention to perform is swayed by his emotions.
-One who loves to sing does not only sing with "feelings" but is
moved and motivated to sing when the occasion is there.
 -Emotions are generally instinctive in origin.
-Neither the degree of their intensity, clarity, or awareness makes
them human acts to be judged as good or evil.
-They become good or evil by the attitude of the person
manifesting them.
-A person who nourishes his feeling of hostility towards another
is more prone to acquire the motive for inflicting harm on the object of
his hatred.
-This is not to say that man is helpless in the tide of his emotions
and that man's responses to action are emotionally motivated.
-It means simply that man's thoughts and actions are colored by
his emotions.
 Refinement of Emotions
-Ethics deals with emotions as factors affecting human
motivation and behavior. Instead of repressing them, it calls for their
refinement. This means that man is expected to act not only with his
mind and body, but precisely with his heart and soul.
-Thus, for instance, the Decalogue does not merely command
that we love God, but adds to say "with all your heart and with all
your soul".
 -In the purist sense, doing good for another is not a
virtue unless it comes from the "love" of what is good. Any
other motive is inadequate regardless of the merits of the
assistance offered. It is possible indeed to extend a loan to a
friend and this - grudgingly.
-In like manner, mere external obedience to a law is cold
and hypocritically convenient. The ethical expectation is to
enter into the spirit of the law and to accept it with humility
and respect."
 It is evident", says Bernard Haring, "that education,
through proper discipline and cultivation of emotional life (in
which we include the cultivation of the values of character and
disposition), is in many ways more significant than the tense
straining of will power."
-Indeed, the vain of ethics is not to turn man into an efficient
machine to do things. Rather, it hopes to transform man by inner
spiritual conversion.
Moral perfection comes from within. We, Filipinos, refer to it
as "kagandahan ng loob". It is "loob" because it radiates from
within the human personality.
 Kagandahan ng Loob
-Kagandahan ng loob refers to attitude. It stands for all that is
good, we call kabaitan, in a human being. Itis the multiplicity of
sterling qualities, both natural and acquired, which, because they
proceed from the heart and mind, also greatly influence one's
behavior towards himself and others.
-Kagandahan ng loob includes such moral values as
mapagmahal, maunawain, may pakikiramdam, may-pakikiramay,
matulungin, masayahin, and hindi mapagkunwari.
 THE ENDS OF THE HUMAN ACT
The Ends of Human Act
-Man does not act aimlessly. His every action is done for a
purpose. The purpose of human acts is significant because it defines
the nature of an act and reveals the moral judgment of the doer.

The Meaning of End

-The "end" is the purpose or goal of an act. It is either the end
of the act itself or the end of the doer.
 -The end of the act is the natural termination or completion of
an activity. The end of eating is nourishment; that of reading is
comprehension; that of basketball is scoring a goal, and that of
talking is communication. Actions are identified by their natural end.
The act of buying differs from selling, although both involve the
exchange of a commodity. The act of stealing differs from receiving
a gift, although both actions put the doer in possession of something.

- The end of the doer is the motive or reason why a person

performs an act. A person, for example, eats either to appease hunger
or to indulge his appetite. A housewife saves money because she
wants to buy an appliance or to pay for a vacation.
 -A person thinks first of a purpose before acting.
-When the purpose is accomplished, the person ceases to
act. Hence, the motive is said to be "first in intention" but
"last in execution."
-Actions are the means for fulfilling a person's wishes or
intentions.
 Kinds of End
The end of the doer is either (1) proximate and remote, (2)
intermediate and ultimate.
1. The proximate end is the purpose which the doer wishes to
accomplish immediately.
The remote end is the purpose which the doer wishes to accomplish
sometime later. The proximate end of eating is the satisfaction of hunger.
Its remote end is the promotion of one's health.
2. The intermediate end is that which is sought as a means for
obtaining another thing.
The ultimate end is that which is desired for its own sake. The
intermediate end may either lead to another intermediate or an ultimate
end. The ultimate end completes an act and stops the further activity.
 A student may think of his graduation as his ultimate purpose.
The series of activities that engage him in school, like attending
classes, writing reports, joining a club, and passing tests, are
intermediate ends leading to the ultimate end of obtaining an
academic degree or diploma.

The ultimate end is the drive that moves a person to act and
undertake even difficult and dangerous tasks. A series of diverse
actions finds meaning in relation to the ultimate end. Our routine
daily activities, for instance, are related to our ultimate desire to live.
 Action and Motivation
The following principles describe human activity:
1. Every action is performed for the sake of a definite end or purpose. Man is
a motivated animal. For him to act, he must first have a motive. A motive may be
instantaneous when one stands up to answer the doorbell or picks up something
from the floor.
Some motives are modest and inconsequential. Some are significant and important.
An act done for a purpose is said to be deliberate or intentional. An act done
without an intended purpose is said to be accidental.
2. Every action is intended towards an ultimate end. Every action is a move
to accomplish something. The concept of action implies an ultimate end, which
would satisfy the need of the doer. No sane person would take a bus without
wanting to go someplace. Every traveler has a final destination.
3. Every doer moves towards an end which he thinks suitable for him.
Man does not wish anything except that which is beneficial or
suitable to him.
-Hence, every human act is a tendency towards what is good
because only what is good is suitable to man. Nobody desires evil for
its own sake.
-The desire for money, for example, induces a thief to steal.
Evil actions are done for the sake of attaining something good.
 The End as Good
Man acts in order to obtain something good for himself.
Therefore, the concept of good is synonymous with that of end or
purpose. Man does not desire evil for its own sake. Only what is
good could be the end or purpose of an act, either the ultimate end or
the intermediate end.
Aristotle defines "Good" as "anything which fits or suits a
function." Food is good either because it suits one's taste or the need
for nourishment. Clothes are good because they fit the personality of
the user, or they provide comfort. On a higher level, actions are good
when they fit the moral integrity of a person.
 Those acts which fit human nature are said to be good. They are
"maka-tao," Those acts which are unfit to human nature are evil.
They are "hindi maka-tao. "

Aristotle teaches that because it is the soul that constitutes the

essentiality of rational nature, the good that truly fits man fits the
function of the soul. This means that human acts are good when they
are consistent with reason. Accordingly, we speak of actions as being
in accordance or not with the "dictate of reason."
 -Evil which is presented to the mind as something good, is
called an apparent good. For example, stealing is desired as good
because it is an opportunity for the thief to have something of value
for himself.
-Crimes are committed because the criminals regard their evil
acts as instrumental to getting something good.
Thus, a student would cheat during an examination in order to
pass the subject. A politician would wish his rival candidate
murdered because he wants to win the election.
 Kinds of Good
1. Essential and Accidental. An essential good satisfies the need of a
person as a human being. Food, clothing, shelter, tools, and education
are essential goods. Accidental good is that which satisfies the want
of a person because of his particular situations. Expensive clothes, a
big house, a flashy car are the personal wants of a rich man.

2. Real and Apparent. Real good is anything which has intrinsic

value. These could be things, activities, relationships, or persons. An
apparent good is an evil that is viewed subjectively as something of
value, such as cigarettes, prohibited drugs, and vices.
3. Perfective and Non-perfective. Perfective good is that which
contributes to the integral growth or development of a person, such
as education, virtue, food, and medicines. Non-perfective good is
anything that merely contributes to a person's external appearance or
convenience, such as expensive clothes, money, title, or car.

4. Perfect and Imperfect. Anything lacking in some qualities is

imperfect. A perfect is a real good endowed with all essential
qualities needed to satisfy a need.
 Perfection is either absolute or relative. An absolute perfection means
complete in all aspects, which is what we mean when speaking of a perfect
circle or a perfect score. A relative perfection is complete only in some
aspects.

The Greatest Good

Every human activity is a tendency towards the attainment of
something good. Not only are individual actions tending towards the
acquisition of good, but human life itself, which is the sum of all activities,
is a movement towards the possession of the greatest good. The greatest
good, or the "summum bonum' in the words of Scholastic philosophers, is
that which is perfect in itself and capable of satisfying all human desires. It
is also the ultimate good because it is the absolutely final thing that is
sought for its own sake
 -The purpose of human existence is the attainment of the
greatest good. The greatest good, according to Aristotle, is happiness.
He writes: "By absolutely final, we mean that which is sought for its
own sake and never as a means to something else.
-Happiness seems to be something of that sort. We also pursue
that for its intrinsic value never as a means. In contrast, we pursue
honor, pleasure, wisdom, and all the virtues, both for their own sakes
(we would want them even if they lead to nothing further) and for the
sake of happiness since we think we shall attain happiness by means
of them.
-But no one wants happiness as a means to these other things,
or indeed as a means to anything else at all
Happiness is either objective or subjective.
-Objectively, happiness refers to something having intrinsic value and
capable of satisfying a human need.
-Subjectively, it is the psychological state of feeling contented resulting
from the attainment of that which is good in itself. The toy (objective) makes the
child happy (subjective).

Happiness contributes to the perfection of a person. Hence, happiness is

not just an emotion or something of value but a state of being.
It is the state of perfection arising from the possession of what is good. Just
as the possession of wealth makes an individual a rich man, the possession of the
greatest good makes a person perfectly happy.
Now, which is the greatest good that would completely fill up all of man's
longing and desires?
 What People Desire
1. Some people regard money or the acquisition of wealth as the
ultimate aim of their life. While desire is legitimate, money does not
satisfy human desire completely. The inordinate desire for riches
makes one avaricious and greedy. Wealth is a cause for worry for
those who fear losing it.

2. Some people regard health and physical beauty as foremost in

importance. Health, of course, is necessary because it is a
prerequisite to a productive life. But health and physical beauty are
easily lost to illness and age.
3. Some people indulge themselves in worldly pleasures. But
pleasures in themselves are limited by our natural capacity for them.
They do not last for long and often lead to unhappiness. Eating so
much causes stomach aches, if not unwanted weight or obesity.
Imprudent indulgence in liquor, tobacco, drugs, or sex exposes one to
illness and death.

4. Some people seek fame and power. But these things are as
perishable as the admired flowers in a vase. A rumor of indiscretion
can easily taint fame and popularity. Power changes hands as quickly
and as often as the direction of the wind.
5. Some people would want to dedicate themselves to the cultivation
of science and arts. This is a worthy pursuit that leaves a mark in the
lives of other people. But knowledge is not useful unless it becomes
an instrument for helping other people.

6. Some people would consecrate themselves to religious life. But the

practice of religion and the cultivation of virtues are aimed at
attaining spiritual perfection
 Natural and Supernatural Happiness
Natural happiness is that which is attainable by man through the use of his natural
powers. Supernatural happiness is that which is attainable by man through his own
powers aided by the infusion of grace from God.
Aristotle does not go beyond earthly life in his dissertation on the ultimate end of
man. Christian philosophers, notably St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, teach that
since man's desire and tendency towards happiness is unlimited, nothing short of the
Absolutely Perfect Good can satisfy it fully. Therefore, only God in his infinite goodness
is the greatest good, the "summum bonum" of man. Man's heart is restless until it rests in
God, says St. Augustine. But perfect or supernatural happiness is possible only in the
afterlife.

"Natural happiness," says Joseph Buckley, "consists in the perfection that man can
attain through the employment of his body and soul and the powers inherent in them:
intellect, will, internal and external sensory powers, sense appetites, locomotion,
nutrition, and growth" (Man 's Last End, 82).
The Ultimate Purpose
The ultimate purpose of human life is the possession of the
absolutely greatest good. For Aristotle, the object of natural
happiness is not a single good but an aggregate of all the goods that
fit the nature of man as such. The greatest good in this earthly life
consists of all material and spiritual values, which contribute to man's
development as a human being. Because these goods are multiple
and varied, man has to rank in a hierarchy, from the lowest to the
highest
 -The highest good, according to Aristotle, pertains to the
intellect. Thus, he proposes that the ultimate purpose of man in life is
the contemplation of truth.
-The fullness of knowledge is attainable through the practice of
virtue. Aristotle states that "Even if happiness is not sent from
heaven, but comes through virtue and learning or training, it seems
that it is one of the most godlike things. The prize and end of virtue
appear to be the best thing, something godlike and blessed
 -Happiness will also be it within reach of everyone, since,
through learning and exercise, it can be obtained by all who are not
totally corrupted as regards virtue’
It follows that perfect happiness, which is absolute and lasting,
is not possible in this life since man's natural powers are inadequate
to fulfill his needs. The power of the human intellect fails to grasp
the glory of God. But a man may approximate and anticipate perfect
happiness by keeping the faith, loving God and my neighbor, and
practicing virtue. Doing good is happiness in itself.
 Ethical Theories
The inquiry on the ultimate purpose of human life is a central
theme in Ethics. Some theories include:
1. Hedonism is based on the teachings of Epicurus, who regards
pleasure as the ultimate good of man. According to him, pain is an
evil. And because some pleasures may also cause pain, one must be
choosy about his pleasure. Contrary to the popular notion, Epicurus
does not recommend indulgence in sensual pleasures. But the word
"hedonist" is descriptive of a pleasure-seeking individual, "a low-
life."
 2. Aristotelianism proclaims the supremacy of reason over
man's lower appetites. Thus, the highest good of man is the
contemplation of divine truths. The reasonable life is that which is in
accordance with temperance, nothing by excess and nothing by the
defect. This is the Golden Mean.

3. Thomism is based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas.

It holds that man's ultimate purpose consists of the Beatific Vision of
God, which is possible only in the next life and only with the aid of
supernatural grace.
 4. Utilitarianism defines pleasure as that which gives the
greatest happiness to the greatest number of people. John Stuart
Mill's example says that pleasure itself is good but even better when
the most number of people experiences it.

5. Evolutionism proceeds from the biological theories of

Charles Darwin. According to him, the greatest good is rearing the
greatest number of individuals, with perfect faculties, under given
circumstances. Accordingly, moral values are factors of survival,
either of the individual or that of society. Inspired by this theory,
Communism looks forward to the evolution of a "classless society."
 6. Existentialism laments the inadequacy of reason to guide
man in the complexities of life. The attainment of personal
fulfillment, which is the ultimate purpose of one's life, depends
largely on one's faith and personal conviction. Existentialism is either
theistic or atheistic. Notable existentialists are Blaise Pascal, Soren
Kierkegaard, Karl Jaspers, and Jean-Paul Sartre.
 THE DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY
MORALITY (Latin: moralis, lit. manner, character, proper behavior)
The differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between
those that are distinguished as proper and those that are improper. It
can also be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of
conduct from a particular philosophy, religion or culture, or it can be
derived from a standard that a person believes should be universal,
may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness".
• It becomes necessary to ask, what points of contact exist between
human acts and this norm. In other words, it is necessary to
understand what phases of the human act may be measured by the
norm.
• Determines the good and evil of the act
THREE DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY
A.) The act itself (i.e., the object)
B.) The end of the agent
C.) The circumstances other than the end of the agent
A. THE OBJECT
• The act itself as a deed done or to be done, that the act is considered
fact.
• By the act performed, the deed is done.
• If an act as object is good or evil, we say that it has objective
morality.
• If an act considered abstractly is indifferent (neither good or bad),
its morality is determined by the end for which it is performed and by
circumstance which affects it.
 A.1 THE THEORY OF MORAL INSTINCT OR MORAL SENSE
• Also called moral intuitionism or moral sensualism
• Asserts that we discern good and evil by a blind instinct, by sense faculty and
not by understanding.
A.2 THE THEORY OF USEFULNESS
• Also called utilitarianism
• Asserts what is discerned as useful (to individual or to human society) as
good and what is harmful as evil.
B. THE END OF THE AGENT
• We mean that which the agent (doer, performer of an act) intends or
wishes to achieve by his act.
• It is the end he has in view, his purpose, his motive in performing the
act.

PRINCIPLES
• An objectively good act performed for a good purpose takes on a
new goodness from the end.
• An objectively evil act performed for on evil purpose takes on a new
malice or evil from the evil end, and
 • An act which is objectively good, but done for on evil end is
entirely if the evil end is the whole motive of an act likewise the act
is entirely evil if the evil end is gravely evil even if it is not the whole
motive of the act.
• An objectively evil act can never become good by reason of a
good end
• An act which is indifferent objectively becomes good if done
for a good end and evil if done for an evil end.
C. THE CIRCUMSTANCES
• Conditions that affect an act-and may affect it morally.
• Conditions without which the act could exist but which happen to affect
the quality in its performance Example: peace, time company in which the act is
performed.

Seven Circumstance-usually set forth in the mnemonic Latin line.

• QUIS• Who • QUID• What
• UBI• Where • QUIBUS• With what ally
• AUXILIIS• In what condition • QUANDO • When
• QUOMODO• Why
WHO• Circumstance of person, who is the agent? To whom is the
action done.
WHAT• Circumstance of quantity or quality of the object Example:
• Was the amount stolen large or small? • Was the injury
inflicted serious or slight?
WHERE• Circumstance of place
EXAMPLE: • A theft committed in the presence of
the Blessed Sacrament is theft plus sacrilege, the latter evil coming
from the circumstance of place.
WITH WHAT ALLY • Circumstance of means or instrument (the ally
does not mean companion)
• A sin of drunkenness committed through the expenditure
EXAMPLE:

of stolen money takes on added evil from the circumstance of means

(stolen money)
IN WHAT CONDITION? HOW? •Circumstance of manner
EXAMPLE : Was the agent in good faith or bad?
WHEN• Circumstance of time.
EXAMPLE: Did the agent miss mass on Sunday?
WHY• Circumstance of end of the agent
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES INVOLVED IN THE MATTER OF
CIRCUMSTANCES AS DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY
• An indifferent act becomes good or evil by reason of its circumstances.
• A good act may become evil by reason of circumstance.
• A good or evil act may become better or worse, or may take on a new
goodness or evil by reason of circumstances.
• An evil act can never be made good by circumstances
• A gravely evil circumstance entirely vitiates a good act.
• A slightly evil circumstance does not entirely vitiate a good act.